Birdman

TL;DR – disappointing movie, lack of character development, flat. 6/10.

Birdman, a largely recommended and acclaimed movie as of now, was a major disappointment to me. With an idea so rich and visionary, the producers of the film failed to have reached the bar of excellence in my scale. The movie ‘Birdman’, narrates the story of an actor, struggling to regain his glory from the past in his successful film Birdman. The protagonist, in this film, has been portrayed to have schizophrenic tendencies (wherein he communicates with his alter ego, Birdman) and imaginative supernatural powers (such as telekinesis and the power to fly). In addition, the story also describes his relation with his daughter and girlfriend, both of whom work as a personal assistant and an actress, respectively. Furthermore, the writers of the film give light to the lifestyle and regime of the theatre and film industry by introducing a character in contrast to the protagonist, named Mike Shiner. In this review, I will analyse the aspects of the film that could have been improved in terms of execution, and provide reasoning for the several accolades awarded to this film.

Firstly, the film deals with universal themes which connect with every individual striving for success and maintaining family relations in a broken household. Considering the development of the story around the protagonist, this movie also deals with themes like supernaturalism, diabolic human nature to achieve success, and the reality of the film/theatre industry. The picture aimed to illustrate the depth an actor stoops for regaining a once earned fame, and also build the background behind the protagonist and different facets of his life. In my view, the film achieved these aims on a superficial scale without developing the idea substantially. However, if this story was presented as a piece of literature, I’m sure language and literary features would do justice to the filmmaker’s idea.

The film attempts to display the protagonist’s relation with his daughter (assistant), girlfriend, business partner/lawyer, and his co-actor in the play he was trying to stage (Mike Shiner). The development and treatment of these relations were done poorly, as the director alienates the protagonist whilst presenting the entire movie in his perspective as we see his hallucinations. In several instances, the characters seemed to lack chemistry in such a way that individuals seemed to coexist in a setting. In terms of priority, it seems that the filmmaker found the already highlighted schizophrenic tendencies more important than character development.  The father-daughter relationship was suppressed by the overpowering actor-assistant relation, thus making what could’ve been emotionally iconic in the movie more cold and professional.  Nevertheless, there were sparks of hope where this was rectified, for instance, during the scene where the protagonist catches his daughter smoking pot, despite spending her sentence at the rehabilitation centre. Also, the cardinal relationship between the actor and his girlfriend seemed underplayed/underemphasised. There wasn’t much shown, therefore not much can be said about the girlfriend. This thus contributes to the problem of underdevelopment of the protagonist.

What saved a bit of goodness in this film was the striking contrast between Mike Shiner and the protagonist. This contrast beautifully addressed several themes and aims of the film, such as, the method of achieving success (Mike Shiner does so by bad publicity, whilst the protagonist strives to achieve publicity for good), and regaining a once achieved fame. In this aspect, Mike Shiner represented everything the protagonist wouldn’t do for attaining success, to the extent that Mike Shiner redefines success in his terms. To Mike Shiner, success was defined by fame regardless if the publicity achieved was for good or bad. Contrastingly, the protagonist defined success by the appreciation he gets from the crowd and the critics. Mike Shiner went to the extent of attempting to rape a co-actress, whilst the protagonist shot himself in a scene to achieve super-realism, which therefore sprouted appreciation. As the contrasts progress throughout the film, it is also seen that the protagonist unintentionally experiences bad publicity when he gets locked out of the theatre in his underpants, which again highlights the theme of strive for success and achieves the aim.

Cinematography though was spot on throughout, the angles, colours, lighting, and shots contributed well in helping the audience envision the scene with the right mood and perspective of the protagonist. What the movie lacked in plot and character enhancement, it achieved in the camera direction that realizes the filmmaker’s vision. Nevertheless, if the filmmaker stroke a balance with all these aspects, I’m sure the movie would’ve been considered a masterpiece.

Lastly, my thoughts on the ambiguous ending: The ambiguity annoyed me more as it added on to the disappointment I had throughout the movie due to the above mentioned aspects. Had the movie been properly directed and scripted with a balance of emotions, character development and depth in plot, the ambiguous end would’ve added an element of surprise, as seasonings would to a salad. The movie had so much potential in terms of what the filmmaker envisioned, but was not executed with justice. If I’d have to rate the movie, I’d give it a 6/10.